A Dialogical Self-Approach To Understanding Teacher Identity in Times of Educational Innovations

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro.
2, e1572 ISNN: 0211-3481
 https://doi.org/10.5565/rev/qpsicologia.1572
A dialogical self-approach to understanding teacher iden-

tity in times of educational innovations
Un enfoque dialógico del self para comprender la identidad del profesor en
tiempos de innovaciones educativas
Carles Monereo
Universitat Autónoma de Barcelona
Antoni Badia
Universitat Oberta de Catalunya
Abstract
Scientific literature has repeatedly demonstrated the difficulty of implementing relevant and
sustained educational innovations. In this article, we defend that a deep and permanent
change can only be achieved if the professional identity of the teachers participating in the in-
novation is changed. From the perspective of the Dialogical Self Theory, this change of identity
implies a change in the I-positions of the individual participants, but also of their identity as a
team or We-position.
Keywords: Education; Educational personnel; Teacher Professional Identity; Dialogical
Self Theory
Resumen
La literatura científica ha demostrado repetidamente la dificultad de implementar innovacio-
nes educativas relevantes y sostenidas. En este artículo, sostenemos que sólo se puede lograr
un cambio profundo y permanente si se cambia la identidad profesional de los docentes que
participan en la innovación. Desde la perspectiva de la Teoría del Self Dialógico, este cambio
de identidad implica un cambio en las I-posiciones de los participantes individuales, pero tam-
bién de su identidad como equipo o We-posición.
Palabras clave: Educación; Personal docente; Identidad profesional del profe-
sor; Teoría del self dialógico
2 Monereo, Carles & Badia, Antoni
INTRODUCTION
Changing the practices of an education practitioner, such as a teacher, an advi-
sor or the head of an educational centre, is not easy. Given that changes in in-
dividual practices also affect education as a whole and its institutional culture,
such a transformation is a very complex task if not somewhat idealistic. Chang-
es intended to be sustained over time cannot be superficial and should not
merely involve establishing a set of general pedagogical principles anticipated
to be readily accepted by participants.
Permanent, deep and sufficient changes in professional practices alter an indi-
vidual’s sense of self, his/her identity, and the identity of the group from
which he or she is part (Gaete Vergara, 2018). These modifications also apply
to intended changes designed to embrace the introduction of new educational
methods and techniques. While promoting changes based in constructivist prin-
ciples through cooperative work, problem-solving or educational projects might
help, consequences on changing practices are reduced or worse can result in a
professional identity crisis unless such efforts are accompanied by measures af-
fecting a participant’s personal, professional and group identity (Collet-Sabe,
2017; Sadovnikova, & Mirzaahmedov, 2019; Twyford, Fevre, & Timperley,
2017).
The scientific literature has repeatedly evidenced the difficulty of implement-
ing relevant and sustained educational innovations. Despite enthusiasm and ini-
tial support from the educational community, obstacles are common, and re-
sults are usually limited. In addition, resulting feelings of disappointment have
motivated a reluctance to change and to attack innovations and demand a re-
turn to more traditional teaching methods based on the authority of the teach-
er and the use of traditional conferences. From our point of view, what is miss-
ing is a professional development model that leads the desired direction of in-
novation, which cannot be reduced to the will or knowledge of individual
teachers (Hayward & Spencer, 2010; Ivanova & Popova, 2017). Concepts, strat-
egies, and feelings related to repeated practices over the years are deeply
rooted and difficult to modify through sheer will (Westaway & Graven, 2019).
This is true for both teachers and the entire educational community, students,
parents, and administrators (for the Hispanic context, we recommend review-
ing Rivas, 2017, and for the Anglo-Saxon context, the excellent reflections of
Heick, 2019).
In this paper, we argue that changes in teachers’ identity, both individually and
collectively, serve as excellent indicators for assessing the quality of educa-
tional innovations. To achieve this goal, we first compare current approaches
to teacher training and innovation while highlighting the advantages of a dia-
http://quadernsdepsicologia.cat
A dialogical self-approach to understanding teacher identity in times of educational innovations 3
logical approach. Second, we defend the crucial importance of educational in-

novations for promoting identity changes, and third, we provide an example of
how to use a dialogical analysis to evaluate the effects of a case, both realistic
and plausible, of educational innovation.
CURRENT PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES OF TEACHER LEARNING

Over the last twenty years, two different perspectives on teacher learning can
be identified from the academic field of Educational Psychology. We will refer
to these perspectives as teacher knowledge development and teacher compe-
tencies development.
Contributions based on teacher knowledge development focus on the study of
theoretical concepts such as teachers’ practical theories (Levin & He, 2008),
teachers’ beliefs (Ertmer, 2005), teachers’ conceptions (Abd-El-Khalick & Le-
derman, 2000), teachers’ approaches (Trigwell, Prosser, & Waterhouse, 1999),
teachers’ attitudes (Avramidis & Norwich, 2002), and teachers’ perceptions
(Beijaard, Verloop, & Vermunt, 2000).
The teacher knowledge development perspective covers at least three differ-
ent learning mechanisms: teachers’ acquisition of knowledge, teachers’ con-
struction of knowledge, and teachers’ co-construction of meanings (Putnam &
Borko, 2000).
Learning Programme Purpose of teacher Instructional

mechanism content education approach
Acquisition of
To provide access to
academic Predetermined Direct instruction
Teacher knowledge
content
knowledge
development
Guided learning
Construction of To support teachers’ through specific
Open
knowledge learning processes learning assignments
Social co- Participation in

To socially share
construction of Negotiated communities through
meanings
meanings social interaction
Table 1. Teacher knowledge development perspective
The first mechanism, acquisition of academic knowledge, refers to how teach-

ers can extend their existing knowledge by acquiring predetermined content,
usually through direct instruction. Early cognitive theories typically character-
ized teacher learning in this way and focused their analysis on expanding
teachers’ knowledge, connections between concepts and overarching ideas
guiding teaching decisions (see Table 1) (Rovegno, 1992).
Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

The second mechanism, construction of knowledge, refers to how a teacher’s

existing knowledge can be qualitatively modified and enriched, usually through
methods such as guided learning during learning assignments. In this case,
teacher learning is understood and explained using different types of concep-
tual frameworks such as: a) teacher cognition theory and the conceptual
change model, which explain how teachers modify their understanding and
views about, for example, the nature of science (Abd-El-Khalick & Akerson,
2004); b) situated learning theory, which focuses on how teachers gain access
to the complex, critical thinking processes used by expert teachers in their
classrooms (Leaman & Flanagan, 2013); or c) the Vygotskian approach, which
analyses how teachers can learn within their zones of proximal development
(Warford, 2011).
The last mechanism included in this perspective, social co-construction of
meanings, aims to explain how teachers, as participants in a group, community
or network of professionals, can negotiate and build a socially shared meaning
from their individual existing knowledge. This teacher learning mechanism usu-
ally operates when teachers participate in a social milieu such as a learning
community and are engaged in the negotiation of meanings with other teach-
ers. Teacher learning as social participation is framed by the socio-
constructivist approach, which explains mechanisms of learning in communities
of practice (Beijaard, 2017; Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1999).
Research on these three teachers learning mechanisms shares the common goal
of learning more about teachers’ knowledge and the process through which
teachers adopt new perspectives. The first two mechanisms focus on the indi-
vidual level while the third examines the interpersonal and social levels. De-
spite the enormous amount of psychological research that has been carried on
these learning mechanisms, two issues have not been analysed in depth: a) re-
lationships between different aspects of teacher learning (e.g., teachers’ be-
liefs, views, attitudes, or theories) and b) relationships between knowledge,
thinking, and classroom behaviour.
The teacher competencies development perspective focuses on acquiring and
practising a set of skills to carry out teaching (Jennings & Greenberg, 2009),
promote reflective teachers (Kim, Xie, & Cheng, 2017), and regulate and assess
teachers’ competencies (Admiraal, Hoeksma, van de Kamp, & van Duin, 2011)
(see Table 2).
The first mechanism of this perspective, practising teaching skills, involves en-
hancing the quality of teaching and often takes into account classifications of
teachers’ competencies according to a set of teaching roles described in terms
of standards and developed by means of teacher skills training programmes.
Learning Programme Purpose of Instructional

mechanism content teacher education approach
Practising A set of teaching To improve the Teacher skills
teaching skills standardized skills quality of teaching training
competencies
development
Reflection on
In-context use of To develop
Teacher
teaching Strategic teaching

competencies reflective teachers
competencies
To further
Self-regulation of Regulated use of
teachers’
teaching competencies Inquiry teaching
professional
competencies through inquiry
development
Table 2. Teacher competencies development perspective
Some examples of this approach include in-service training on teachers’ com-

petencies in classroom management in secondary schools (Piwowar, Thiel, &
Ophardt, 2013) and a preservice teacher learning course on instructional plan-
ning aligned with USA national standards for teacher preparation (Peterson &
Bond, 2004).
The second mechanism, reflection on teaching competencies, aims for the de-
velopment of a reflexive teacher (Hatton & Smith, 1995) through the use of in-
struments and strategies to promote different types and phases of teacher re-
flection. Examples of ways to promote reflection among teacher include the
use of video recordings and related instructional strategies (Blomberg, Sherin,
Renkl, Glogger, & Seidel, 2014) and the use of written text in student teacher
portfolios (Toom, Husu, & Patrikainen, 2015).
The third mechanism, self-regulation of teaching competencies, refers to the
process of professional teaching development designed to promote self-
regulation in teaching through metacognitive processes such as planning, moni-
toring and adjusting. This may involve teachers’ engagement in processes of
collaborative inquiry to promote shifts in practice as part of their professional
development via recursive cycles of goal-directed, self-regulated inquiry among
teachers (Butler & Schnellert, 2012).
Both psychological perspectives of professional teacher learning focus on
teachers’ development of professional “assets” defined as desired outcomes
that must be learned by teachers. Three critical limitations of both perspec-
tives include the following. a) They assume accumulation and linearity in mov-
ing from a novice level to an expert level; b) they do not explain how the de-
velopment of an asset can affect the development of other assets, and c) they
do not clarify how teachers make sense of their teaching practices. New psy-

chological perspectives focusing on teachers’ identities and based on the dia-

logical self-approach may provide us with a new perspective that overcomes
these limitations (Akkerman & Meijer, 2011).
TEACHERS’ CHANGES IN PROFESSIONAL IDENTITY FROM THE DIALOGICAL SELF-

APPROACH
The dialogical self-approach defines a human being as a subjective person who
can make sense of the world due the dialogic nature of the self. The subjective
dialogical self of a particular teacher can be described as the mental space in
which, through language and inner speech, a teacher develops meaningful per-
sonal understandings of the professional world and his/her own way of being a
teacher in a particular professional scenario (Hermans, 2001). This mental
space is populated by different voices, one’s own voice and the voices of oth-
ers, which interact and dialogue with each other in trying to make sense of the
steady flow of professional information and the professional activities in which
one participates.
Teachers actively use their voices in interactive (social) contexts (Arvaja, 2016)
to adopt different I-positions in professional life. Each I-position is considered a
temporal teacher’s distinct voice situated in a specific setting. A particular
teacher’s voice represents a set of utterances denoting how to engage in a spe-
cific scenario. A specific teacher’s I-position entails positioning in his/her social
and intrapsychological dimensions (Gülerce et al., 2014) and is shaped by two
components. The first is the I or subject-position, which can be defined as the
first-person perspective from which the world and the self are perceived, expe-
rienced and evaluated. It provides the subject with a sense of freedom, initia-
tive and personal agency, and it is what identifies us as subjects. The second is
the position, which is a particular current social and institutional function that
can be developed by teachers in culture, society, communities, or institutions.
The identity of a particular teacher can be described based on a dynamic mul-
tiplicity of relatively autonomous but interrelated I-positions in the landscape
of his/her human mind (Hermans, Kempen, & Van Loon, 1992); therefore, a
teacher’s I-position is considered a subjective expression of his/her teacher
identity (Raggatt, 2015).
The dialogical self-approach involves at least two different teacher learning
mechanisms: renaming experience and reconstructing practice (Freeman,
1993). Renaming experience involves teachers being critically reflexive, rene-
gotiating and assigning new meanings to their teaching practice, and in this
way developing their own voices. Reconstructing practice refers to the process
of developing new teaching actions in the classroom and is closely related to
the notion of teaching I-positions. Table 3 shows the main characteristics of

this perspective.
Programme Purpose of Instructional

Learning
teacher
mechanisms content approach
education
To promote
Teachers’
Renaming Teachers’ views teachers’ teaching
Teacher identity
reflections on
experience about teaching sense-making
development
teaching
processes
To promote
The range of I- changes in existing Induced, shared,
Reconstructing
positions on teachers’ I- and dramatized
practice
teaching positions on incidents
teaching
Table 3. Teaching identity development perspective
The first learning mechanism, renaming experience, involves the appropriation

of teachers’ professional discourse through different dialogical processes and is
ultimately intended to promote changes in how teachers make sense of their
teaching practices. Teachers’ professional discourse is not conceived merely as
a set of words, utterances or texts about teaching. Further, it is considered “a
sort of ‘identity kit’ which comes complete with [ways] to act, talk, and often
write, to take on a particular social role that others will recognize” (Gee, 1990,
p. 142). One well-known means to promote the appropriation of teachers’ pro-
fessional discourse involves developing teachers’ reflection on critical incidents
in teaching (Badia & Becerril, 2016).
The second learning mechanism, reconstructing practice, involves reshaping or
re-positioning one or more teachers’ I-positions. Most teachers start practising
from a dominant I-position and gradually, when faced with critical experiences
or incidents, re-position (Arvaja, 2016; Branco & Madureira, 2008). They shift,
in the words of Reinekke Lengelle (2016), from a "first story" to a "second story"
from which they manifest new I-positions that allow them to better face those
critical incidents.
An instructional strategy that has proven effective in re-positioning teachers
and fostering these ‘second stories’ is the “dramatized incident”. Due to the
emotional value of critical incidents during teaching, this training strategy may
have a substantial impact on teachers’ mental dynamics and may provoke ten-
sions among teachers’ voices and I-positions (Pillen, Beijaard & Den Brok,
2013).

Over the last ten years we have investigated the effects of different training
devices based on incidents. A first approach focuses on triggering incidents in
the classroom. For this approach, researchers (or a teacher colleague) prepare
an incident that the teacher considers real since he/she is not aware that an
incident has been planned (Monereo, Badia, Bilbao, Cerrato & Weise, 2009).
Though this is a useful and authentic approach, it obviously raises severe deon-
tological concerns.
A second strategy involves the use of anonymous written reports whereby the
teacher and students explain what has happened in the classroom and propose
changes (Scartezini & Monereo, 2016). While this method is not intrusive, its
efficacy depends on the teacher’s willingness to accept criticism.
A third approach involves simulating situations in which teachers must cope
with incidents to which they are specially sensitized. In this case, colleagues
(usually participants in a shared course or workshop or members of a communi-
ty of learning) provoke the types of incidents that teachers have struggled with
in their teaching (Monereo, Weise & Álvarez, 2013). This is the most efficient
strategy in terms of time (a period of 20 hours) and efficacy (the quantity and
quality of changes).
Internal dynamics between the different I-positions provoke a set of interac-
tions with certain regularity that may be described by the type of influence
they exert on the rest. Hubert Hermans (2018) has tried to describe and char-
acterise these. Without going into detail, they stand out especially for their
power to promote significant identity changes: core I-positions, counter I-
positions, coalitions, third I-positions, over I-positions, promoter and anti-
promoter I-positions, and meta-positions.
A core I-position is a central position on which the functioning of many other I-
positions depends. A counter I-position is a position that responds to another
position from which it is spatially differentiated. Coalitions are I-positions that
cooperate and strengthen each other in achieving a particular goal. A third I-
position arises from the conflict between two positions and assumes its resolu-
tion in the form of a new negotiated position that reconciles those in dispute.
Over I-positions are so overvalued and exaggerated that they hardly have a
counter I-position, creating a dangerous imbalance. Promoter positions have
been likened to the role of a play's director, who guides, overseas, connects,
and can act as an innovator for characters on a stage (Valsiner, 2004). A pro-
moter I-position implies an openness to the future and an ability to harmonize
positions that appear and are identified by the meta-position. The promoter I-
position can “reorganize the self towards a higher level of development” and
provides room for both continuity and discontinuity in the self (Hermans &
Hermans-Konopka, 2010, p. 228). The counter I-position, of course, performs

the inverse function.
Finally, Hubert Hermans and Agnieszka Hermans-Konopka (2010, p. 147) char-
acterized meta-positions in the following way: (1) “[a meta-position] permits
some distance from the other positions”, (2) “provides an overarching view so
that several positions can be seen simultaneously and their mutual relation-
ships visible”, (3) “makes it possible to see the linkages between positions as
part of one's personal history or the collective history of the group or culture to
which one belongs” and (4) “facilitates the creation of a dialogical space (in
contact with others or oneself) in which positions and counter-positions engage
in dialogical relationships”.
The dynamic relationships between these different types of I-positions stimu-
late a continuous intra-psychological tension between movements, which tend
to organize and structure the mental space (centring processes) or which de-
stabilize existing forms of organization (processes of decentring), precipitating
spaces for change.
Both centring and decentring movements are at the core of what dialogical
training and counselling aim to realise, producing changes in teachers’ profes-
sional identities through tensions between I-positions and their voices. In addi-
tion, this dynamic seeks to achieve changes in the voices and identities of a
collective group working in coordination or their We-position. A We-position is
a position shared by a group of people (e.g., a team of teachers) in relation to
an idea, conflict or event (Hermans, 2018).
The trigger the spurs these changes may have its origin in the internal dialogue
between positions, but it is often generated from an external factor classified
as problematic because it generates individual and/or collective incidents.
More specifically, an educational innovation would fully enter this definition as
it is a proposal that problematizes an existing situation and causes incidents at
both individual and collective levels. We delve into this idea below.
EDUCATIONAL INNOVATIONS AS GENERATORS OF CRITICAL INCIDENTS

According to the OECD (2016), educational innovation can be defined as:
The act of creating and then disseminating new educational tools as well as
new instructional practices, organisational forms and technology. Although
innovation is not a research programme, it is often based on research and
advances in knowledge and consists in changing processes and practices to
improve the quality and productivity of the service which is delivered. (p.
126)

Therefore, the ultimate goal of educational innovation is to improve what is

done in both quality and efficiency.
When educators are asked what innovation means (Room 241, 2018), they refer
to effectiveness and efficiency in relation to their students and contribute two
new ideas of great interest. On one hand, an attitude of change among partici-
pants can promote risk taking and a desire to try alternative ways of solving re-
al problems without fear of failing. This can involve promoting an I-position
that some authors have referred to as the "pedagogical innovator" (Avidov-
Ungar & Forkosh-Baruch, 2018). On the other hand, the entire educational
community should participate in a project to achieve more significant commit-
ment and motivation. Courage, motivation and commitment linked to an atti-
tude of change in the educational community seem to be key to facing innova-
tion. However, to prevent this from involving reckless or imprudent action,
change must have a strong justification in that it must be essential and have
certain guarantees of success in the sense that it is plausible within a particular
context.
Situations in which there is consensus on the ways educational agents interpret
educational innovation (i.e., they consider it as a viable improvement and ac-
cept the challenge of changing their pedagogical principles and practices) are
not very common. There are frequently opposing forces, creating barriers to
implementation and resulting in failure in many cases (Geijsel, Sleegers, van
den Berg, & Kelchtermans, 2001).
In this sense, we assume that all educational innovations act as generators of
incidents or as events that produce emotional imbalances in participants. When
a certain incident exceeds a certain threshold, destabilizing the emotional con-
trol of individuals and groups, it is a critical incident. Any educational innova-
tion can create tensions among teachers, which necessitates considerable ne-
gotiation and agreement between the I-position of each teacher. For this rea-
son, research on teachers and their relationships to educational innovation has
become a priority focus over the last twenty years (Ketelaar, Beijaard, Bosh-
uizen, & Den Brok, 2012).
Research on how teachers perceive innovation has provided relevant infor-
mation on the conditions that foster the introduction of innovation programmes
into schools (Geijsel, Sleegers et al, 2001), the role of teachers’ motivations to
promote educational innovation (Abrami, Poulsen & Chambers, 2004), and the
obstacles perceived by teachers throughout the innovation process (Stevens,
2004). According to Evelien Ketelaar, Maaike Koopman, Perry Den Brok, Douwe
Beijaard and Henry Boshuizen (2014), the process of understanding innovation
is an:
Active cognitive and emotional process in which teachers try to relate in-
formation derived from innovation with their knowledge, their beliefs and
experiences [...]. This process is dynamic, as teachers use their own identi-
ty or frame of reference as a lens to make sense of the innovation [...], but
at the same time, their identity or frame of reference can change in the
process. (p. 316)
Teachers can experience different degrees of congruence between their beliefs
and values regarding innovation and depending on this are less or more likely to
be enthusiastic about such innovation. That is, teachers compare their views,
beliefs and feelings with respect to their usual practices with the demands and
characteristics of the proposed innovation (Spillane, Reiser, & Reimer, 2002).
From this perspective, all educational innovations require changes in teachers’
professional identities, and these changes "imply a relationship between the
socio-cognitive construction of new meanings and the creation of individual and
emotional senses of new experiences" (Geijsel & Meijers, 2005, p. 419). Re-
search has also highlighted the interdependence between identity and educa-
tional innovation. The introduction of new educational innovations affects the
identities of teachers (Beijaard, Meijer, & Verloop, 2004; Day, Sammons, Sto-
bart, Kington, & Gu, 2007; Geijsel & Meijers, 2005), which affects how teach-
ers respond to educational innovations (Schmidt & Datnow, 2005; Van Veen &
Sleegers, 2006).
In a relatively recent study, Yam Sam Chee, Swati Mehrotra and Jing Chuan Ong
(2015) showed how teachers who participate in an innovation process change
their identities and how this change reflects the success of innovation. The
participants modified their epistemological positions (e.g., by changing their
beliefs and practices regarding how to use textbooks in the classroom); praxio-
logical positions (e.g., by changing their ways of relating to their students); on-
tological positions (e.g., by reflecting on their professional learning), and axio-
logical positions (e.g., by changing their values with respect to certain teaching
practices).
There is agreement on the fact that the following four dimensions decisively
contribute to identity change in the face of educational innovation (Ketelaar et
al., 2012): a) changes related to acquiring new knowledge; b) changes related
to sensemaking processes of innovation; c) changes linked to innovation owner-
ship; and d) changes related to agency.
In regard to the acquisition of knowledge, Jay Fogleman, Barry Fishman, and
Joe Krajcik (2006) demonstrated the importance of sustaining innovation
through leading teachers’ learning and of supporting their professional devel-
opment. In the same vein, Inge Bakkenes, Jan Vermunt, and Theo Wubbels

(2010) focused on describing teachers’ learning activities and outcomes in the

context of educational innovation. Moreover, Jianwei Zhang, Huang-Yao Hong,
Marlene Scardamalia, Chew Lee Teo, and Elisabeth A. Morley (2011) explored
teachers’ knowledge-building processes as a critical principle based on innova-
tion in primary schools.
Recent contributions focus on the process of fostering teachers’ sensemaking
and on exploring how coordinating groups of a curriculum are involved in pro-
cesses of sensemaking and negotiation (Pietarinen, Pyhältö, & Soini, 2017;
Soini, Pietarinen, & Pyhältö, 2018). These authors studied educational innova-
tion activities associated with the implementation of education reforms across
the Finnish education system. Findings drawn from longitudinal focus groups
and interviews reveal that coordination groups have used several complemen-
tary strategies to develop a shared understanding of district-level curricula
through comparison, standardization, and transformation.
Likewise, teachers’ feelings of ownership over educational innovation are also
considered an essential characteristic of teachers’ positions on innovation
(Ketelaar et al., 2014). Teachers’ ownership reflects the degree to which
teachers support innovative ideas. Teachers with high levels of ownership have
a sense of pride about innovation, feel a need to change their practices, are
willing to invest time and energy in innovation and tend to express their identi-
fication with innovation by, for instance, describing their individual experienc-
es to colleagues. Finally, sociality is related to teachers belonging to teams and
specific institutions adopting certain goals, forms of organization and forms of
interaction. This sociality has a significant influence on the development of
professional identity (Vangrieken, Dochy, Raes, & Kyndt, 2015). As a result, ed-
ucational innovations can become a part of teacher professional identity and
can contribute to its sustainability.
Ketelaar et al. (2014) distinguished between two groups of teachers, engaged
and reserved groups, using as a criterion teachers’ positioning on new pedagog-
ies. Overall, engaged teachers exhibited more indications of ownership than
those of the reserved group and more active and explicit ways of making sense
of their experiences according to a new pedagogy. Moreover, both groups
demonstrated high degrees of agency though this manifested in different ways.
The engaged teachers often described the link between the goals they had set
for themselves and their related learning experiences while the reserved
teachers often simply described the situations that they had initiated.
Finally, the notion of teacher agency refers to "the active search for profes-
sional development and learning through the objectives of a teacher" (Beau-
champ & Thomas, 2009, p. 177). As stated by different works (Vähäsantanen,
2015), educational innovations are successful when they rely on professionals

who express a high level of agency. Teachers with a strong sense of agency
show a sufficient level of autonomy in their work and feel that they can guide
and self-control sensemaking processes and make decisions about the process
of educational innovation. In addition, teachers feel that they can handle po-
tential inconsistencies between their views and beliefs and the process of edu-
cational innovation.
Innovation appears both at the intra-psychological and group levels or in indi-
vidual teachers’ identities and the identities of groups of teachers. As Hubert
Hermans (2018) pointed out in a recent publication, Self and Identity are social
but also societal. Society is found in the self, and the self and identities are al-
so observed in society:
It is my purpose to demonstrate that society, rather than being an “exter-
nal” causal factor, is manifesting itself in the self and receiving there an
answer from the same self. Self meets society in itself and, in turn, the so-
ciety meets the self in itself. Along these lines, I want to show that it is
possible to bring self and society closer together (p. 19)
From our perspective, the concept of the We-position comes into play. Re-
member that we are referring to a collective I-position or a position shared by
a group of people such as a team of teachers. As Hermans (2018) highlights,
"the emergence of extended We-positions requires open and flexible bounda-
ries between group identities allowing dialogical relationships to emerge need-
ed for the production of new and common meanings" (p. 135). Accordingly, the
emergence of these We-positions requires producing generative dialogue
through which personal I-positions, at the level of the individual, and We-
positions, at the group level, should be open to creative exploration and learn-
ing from one another to achieve something new and better. In conclusion, as-
sessing the impact of educational innovation and recording and analysing
changes that occur reciprocally among participating teachers and in the groups
in which they work (i.e., in I- and We-positions) reflect systems of more effec-
tive valuation.
As pointed out in the previous section, such a significant and profound change
in the conceptions, strategies and feelings of participants implies a change in
their identity or a change in their individual I-positions and in the We-position
as a collective. As many contributions have emphasized (Akkerman & Meijer,
2011; Assen, Koops, Meijers, Otting & Poell, 2018; Beijaard et al., 2004; Kun-
nen & Metz, 2015; MacLure, 1993; Meeus, Van de Schoot, Keijsers, Schwartz, &
Branje, 2010; Sachs, 2005), teachers’ professional identities at the individual
and group levels are the most critical indicator of a teacher's behaviour and

thinking. A teacher’s identity serves as a lens through which a teacher justifies

and makes sense of his/her interpretations, decisions and practices.
Filip Berta Eva Ivan Christine

Early Teacher
She has just arrived Charismatic Leader
Expert Teacher
Advisor at the centre and Institutional Leader She was once the
She is an excellent
He is the school the team this year He is the coordina- principal of the
teacher and a re-
I-position
psychologist of the and is willing to tor of the depart- centre, and she is
nowned historian
centre and attends learn. Ivan is his ment, essentially highly respected by
with prestigious
meetings as an ob- mentor, whom she because he is a most teachers for
publications and
server and supervi- respects, but she friend of the cen- her innovative ide-
occasional partici-
sor of the innova- wants to do new tre’s director, who as and empathy in
pation in the mass
tion. things and admires put him in charge. personal relation-
media.
Christine’s initia- ships.
tive.
She considers her-
Core I-position as a
self an innovator in
She considers her- He considers him-
professional
He aims to provide education and is in-

self a student of She considers herself a defender of
all resources neces- terested in stu-
veteran teachers self a researcher true history that
sary for the innova- dents’ learning
and enjoys the and teacher of his- must be transmit-
tion to be success- outcomes and in us-
teaching profes- tory. ted to new genera-
ful. ing history to help
sion. tions.
them understand
the world.
He is loyal to the
directive team that Her leading sup-
She sometimes
Coalition between
has doubts about porter is Filip, and

He tries to unite She feels indebted joins Ivan in de-
the need for inno- as he tries to per-
different members to Ivan but agrees fending the central
positions
vation. He some- suade the whole

of the department more with the ideas role of the curricu-
times joins Eva in team to join, she
and especially the of Christine and lum and encourages
expressing his dis- experiences severe
leaders, Ivan and seeks support and to Christine to keep
trust and believes difficulty with Ivan
Christine. help from Filip. improving every
that Berta, his pu- and sometimes with
day.
pil, should support Eva.
him.
She tries to adopt a
third I-position that
innovation proposal
Relationship to the
He adopts an anti-
allows her to rec-
He adopts a meta- promoter I-position
oncile the conflict
position by trying She sometimes pri- based on the prem- She clearly adopts
between her posi-
to put into play the oritizes the curricu- ise that innovation an I-position that
tion of subordina-
most appropriate I- lum over all other can eliminate con- promotes innova-
tion to Ivan and her
positions for the priorities. tent and lower the tion.
role as a supporter
team’s objectives. demand and there-
of innovation that
fore is sceptical.
encourages Chris-
tine.
He mainly tries to She tries to negoti-
Relationship with
oneself (myself).
He tries to per- She tries to avoid

others and with
negotiate with Ivan ate with Ivan with

She tries to per- suade Eva. With debating with Ivan
and Eva. On the little success. With
suade Berta and Fil- Berta, he some- and Eva and to ne-
other hand, with Filip he tends to
ip while negotiating times uses a com- gotiate with them
Christine and Berta, debate while with
with Ivan and Chris- manding tone. With and Berta. With Fil-
he tends to use Eva and Christine
tine. Filip and Christine, ip, the dialogue is
more generative he tends to negoti-
he debates. more generative.
dialogue. ate.
Table 4. Participants’ characteristics in a case of educational innovation
Traditionally, educational innovations have been evaluated using descriptors

and external, general and quantitative indicators such as the number of people
involved in educational innovation, satisfaction with changes according to sur-
veys, the number of students who pass state exams, etc. All of these are short-
term and superficial measures that do not appropriately reveal the profound,
structural and persistent changes that innovation might have produced.
To observe, record and analyse the evolution of the I-positions of participants
and their corresponding We-positions, we propose two representation tech-
niques. On one hand, the Personal Repertoire of Positions developed by Hubert
Hermans (2001) helps us visualize the trajectory that each participant follows
during innovation, which is individually considered but socially connected
through external positions or others-in-me. On the other hand, a community
Plot represents the evolution of a group of teachers as a team. In the next sec-
tion we present a case based on some of our previous research data to illus-
trate our analysis.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN I-POSITIONS, WE-POSITIONS AND EDUCATIONAL

INNOVATION. AN ILLUSTRATIVE CASE
Imagine a teaching team belonging to the social sciences department of a sec-
ondary school and composed of five professors. This year, the team has decid-
ed to initiate an educational innovation that involves learning through the de-
velopment of an authentic project linked to service to the community and car-
ried out collectively. Table 4 summarizes the characteristics of the partici-
pants.
To represent the different types of relations observed between I-positions
within this group of teachers, we use a set of symbols shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1. Relations between I-positions
Their personal repertoires of positions (PPR, by Hermans, 2001) are as follows:

- Filip, advisor (Figure 2)

Figure 2. Filip’s Personal Positions Repertoire
Filip holds a peripheral role in the team and behaves like a follower. His cen-
tral I-position as an advisor is to be committed to the team of teachers in the
social sciences department. For this reason, he frequently interacts with them
but also with the rest of the teaching centre teams. His institutional position
forces him to maintain a certain level of neutrality by acting as a mediator of
all teams and their members. However, his interest in innovation creates con-
flicts between him and the school principal and especially with Ivan, who does
not consider him neutral. The main contribution that he can make is to trans-
form his I-position as a mediator into a meta-position. This shift allows him to
be aware of the relationships that he has with each role and to decide what
forms of dialogue might best cater to each partner or to at least agree on
tasks, possibilities, and limits.
- Berta, Early Teacher (Figure 3)
Figure 3. Berta’s Personal Positions Repertoire
Berta is the newest team member (as a beginner) and therefore is still under-
going socialization and integration. Her subordination to Ivan creates a signifi-
cant conflict. While she owes her gratitude and loyalty to him because he has
continually endorsed her, a vocational position dominates and leads her to val-
ue the innovative approaches of Christine and to admire Eva's expertise.
In this case, it would be advisable for Berta to develop the third I-position as an
innovative expert. In this way, she could communicate better with the differ-
ent interlocutors as a historian and teacher who wants to continuously develop
herself.
- Eva, Expert Teacher (Figure 4)
Figure 4. Eva’s Personal Positions Repertoire
Eva is the most widely recognized person in the academic field. She shares the
role of expert with other team members, but she stands out in her position as a
researcher, which is her core I-position. This position affords her a prestigious
role in the team and promotes her vocational position by providing her satisfac-
tion in and out of school. However, her non-negotiable defence of complete
and rigorous content produces certain tensions with Christine and Filip. In any
case, Eva appears as one of the main bridges between the most conservative
perspectives of the team and the most innovative ones.
- Ivan, Leader (Institutional) (Figure 5)
Ivan leads the antagonistic position with those who defend the proposed educa-
tional innovation. He has a strong influence on Berta, maintains a relationship
of respect with Eva and has achieved the confidence of the principal. His im-
posed leadership acts as an anti-promoter in his relationship with Christine,
one of the most popular teachers at the centre. This situation is worsened by
one of Ivan´s central views on the pivotal role of teachers in the classroom as

Figure 5. Ivan’s Personal Positions Repertoire
specialists of a subject rather than as educators. This over I-position may rep-
resent the main obstacle to reaching an agreement with Ivan. Persuading Ivan
to construct a counter I-position in relativizing the role of the teacher as the
absolute authority of the classroom would be one of the main changes required
for the smooth running of the team.
- Christine, Leader (Charismatic) (Figure 6)
Figure 6. Christine’s Personal Positions Repertoire
Christine is the leading promoter of the change implied by the proposed inno-
vation. Her popularity makes her a natural leader whose point of view holds
considerable weight in the team and the institution. Her main allies are Filip
and Berta, and she maintains a good relationship with Eva. On the other hand,
her primary opponent, with whom she has experienced ongoing conflict, is
Ivan. By extension, the director of the school also holds particular reservations
about her views of change and innovation, which, in addition to representing a
risk to the centre’s image, may question his own leadership. Given that Chris-
tine is also a relevant historian, it would be advisable for her to elaborate a
third I-position that involves applying specific disciplinary expertise. This
change of position and attitude could bring her even closer to Eva and Berta
and especially to Ivan.
On this point we can imagine a critical incident that could become the formal
complaint of a group of parents to the school principal. Parents may believe
that their children are not learning history with enough rigour and depth due to
them engaging in learning projects with collaborative groups. This situation
produces a "process of decentring" that disorganizes the respective self and
creates spaces for change (e.g., Ivan must decide if he should support his de-
partment colleagues in front of the parents). The evolution of each of the team
members also affects the team’s position as an interdependent global system
(We-position).
To observe and analyse the evolution of a team of teachers and take into ac-
count dimensions that promote the change in identity mentioned above (i.e.,
changes in the team’s knowledge and organization, commitment to innovation
and decision-making and execution), we consider three main axes:
1- As an organizational and political community, the members of the group
share, to a greater or lesser extent, their knowledge regarding:
a) Group history, institutional hierarchies, networks of power and the influ-
ence of each member´s implicit and explicit rules of functioning.
b) Prototypical incidents and ways to cope with them.
c) The distribution of roles and tasks, ways to make and execute decisions,
and ways of rewarding or penalizing actions.
Leaders would tend to occupy the centre of the group because they have a
stronger influence on decisions. Moreover, their net influence is frequently
stronger.
Centrality and influence are the two main variables for visualizing power. To
represent the power and influence of each group member, we use two tools.
First, we use a layout (in black and white images) to identify areas of influ-
ence. A similar plot pattern means that there is mutual influence. Second, spa-
tial positions in the graph illustrate the power of each member. Positioning
close to the centre denotes having more power while positioning on the pe-
riphery can be interpreted as having less power.

2- As a learning and discursive community, team members share, to a greater

or lesser extent, knowledge regarding feelings of ownership and sensemaking in
relation to an educational innovation: objectives, theories and authors, key
concepts, ways to evaluate the impact of innovation, and expected results. The
thickness of arrows graphically represents levels of agreement on educational
innovation where a thicker arrow denotes stronger agreement on the innova-
tion project.
3- The group members, as part of an interactive community, opt for or privi-
lege certain kinds of dialogue to establish relationships. This dialogue can be,
for example, more commanding or persuasive or more negotiated and genera-
tive. In the first case, a subordinated relation is assumed whereas in the sec-
ond, a parallel relation occurs. This dimension is related to the ways in which
group members exercise agency. In this case, the form of dialogue between
two team members is denoted by unidirectional (with a single arrowhead) and
bidirectional arrows (with two arrowheads) and by solid and dashed arrow
lines. A bidirectional arrow with a solid line denotes a more democratic mode
of dialogue while a unidirectional arrow with a dashed line denotes a more au-
thoritarian form of communication.
Figure 7. Teacher Team Community Identity Plot
When we examine the team’s evolution at a certain point in time (Figure 7),
we can analyse the relationships between its members and ultimately its cur-
rent We-position. A We-position would denote balanced conditions with two
distinct forces of influence: that involving Filip and Christine and that involving
Ivan and Berta. As an essential difference, while the first relationship main-
tains a similar discourse and bidirectional form of democratic communication,

in the second relationship, Berta is subordinate to Ivan and the form of dia-
logue that prevails involves an imbalance of power. We also observe that Eva is
related to both groups and occupies an equidistant position. She is central to
negotiation and therefore begins to acquire more power and assume a more
central role in the team.
In any case, the forced assimilation of all members with the innovation may
have negative consequences. As noted by Bosma and Kunnen (2001): "Too much
assimilation results in rigidity and distortion of reality, while too much accom-
modation results in chaotic and superficial commitments" (p. 55). Wenger him-
self, who introduced the concept of communities of practice, in his latest pub-
lications (Wenger-Trayner, Fenton-O'Creevy, Kubiak, Hutchinson, & Wenger-
Trayner, 2014) stresses the importance of resolving tensions between the need
to meet both individual needs and group objectives. He argues for the balanc-
ing of different positions and that rather than seeking absolute consensus, it is
better to encourage engagement and the construction of a team identity that is
much more, he affirms, than mere belonging or sharing particular interests.
In the near future, we intend to apply this analytic framework in a way that al-
lows us to not only observe the systemic and reciprocal evolution of a group
and its members but to also intervene in and achieve a balance that favours a
positive impact of educational innovation.
CONCLUDING REMARKS
The implementation of educational innovation has become a common practice
when it seeks to improve the quality of education in a specific educational sys-
tem. A significant amount of research has explored the variables and factors
that influence implementation and relationships to the characteristics of stu-
dents and teachers involved in this process.
For students involved in educational innovation, analytical frameworks most
frequently used have been based on quantitative external measures related to
students’ outcomes such as improvements in their performance, their results
on national and international tests, their rates of entry into the workforce, or
their perceived satisfaction with innovation. It is also well recognized that sev-
eral of teachers’ characteristics are related to the implementation of educa-
tional innovation, including their efficacy, self-concept and attitudes (Guskey,
1988); experience and efficacy (Ghaith & Yaghi, 1997) and levels of motivation
(Abrami et al., 2004).

The dialogical self-approach applied in teacher professional identity research

and illustrations of how dialogical Self Theory can be used to analyse the posi-
tioning of individual professionals in educational innovation may deepen our
understanding of how the process of educational change works under real con-
ditions in three ways.
First, the dialogical self-approach allows us to relate individual, group and
community levels of educational change. This multilevel approach may further
research on dynamics of change in real settings in which representatives of ed-
ucational administrations, educational leaders, principals, parents and teachers
participate.
Second, the notion of the I-position allows us to establish an integrative view of
a teacher’s internal (subjective dimension) and external dimensions (teaching
practice), overcoming theoretical constructs that separately focus on teacher
changes (e.g., a teacher’s knowledge) or classroom activities (e.g., teaching
practices, learning processes and outcomes, and significant and critical inci-
dents).
Third, the dialogical self-approach allows us to carry out research that consid-
ers time based on trajectories followed by a group of people involved in a
common task at the individual and group levels.
As the main limitation of this theoretical and methodological approach, we
have not yet been able to develop a broader application to real settings. Fu-
ture research in this field would allow us to gain a deeper understanding of
three processes: a) how the theoretical framework of the dialogical self-
approach operates in practice to explain dynamics of change in real scenarios;
b) to what extent methodological tools linked to the dialogical self-approach
are useful for collecting and analysing evidence of changes in contexts of edu-
cational innovation; and c) the actual impact of theoretical and applied
knowledge derived from this kind of research.
REFERENCES
Abd-El-Khalick, Fouad & Akerson, Valarie L. (2004). Learning as conceptual change:
Factors mediating the development of preservice elementary teachers' views of na-
ture of science. Science Education, 88(5), 785-810.
https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.10143
Abd-El-Khalick, Fouad & Lederman, Norman G. (2000). Improving science teachers'
conceptions of nature of science: A critical review of the literature. International
Journal of Science Education, 22(7), 665-701.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690050044044
Abrami, Philip C; Poulsen, Catherine & Chambers, Bette (2004). Teacher motivation to
implement an educational innovation: Factors differentiating users and non-users of
cooperative learning. Educational Psychology, 24(2), 201-216.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0144341032000160146
Admiraal, Wilfried; Hoeksma, Mark; van de Kamp, Marie-Thérèse & van Duin, Gee
(2011). Assessment of teacher competence using video portfolios: Reliability, con-
struct validity, and consequential validity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(6),
1019-1028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2011.04.002
Akkerman, Sanne F. & Meijer, Paulien C. (2011). A dialogical approach to conceptual-
izing teacher identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 308-319.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.013
Arvaja, Maarit (2016). Building teacher identity through the process of positioning.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 59, 392-402.
Assen, Hanneke; Koops, Hilda; Meijers, Frans; Otting, Hans & Poell, Rob (2018). How
can a dialogue support teachers’ professional identity development? Harmonising
multiple teacher I-positions. Teaching and Teacher Education, 73, 130-140.
Avidov-Ungar, Orit & Forkosh-Baruch, Alona (2018). Professional identity of teacher
educators in the digital era in light of demands of pedagogical innovation. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 73, 183-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2018.03.017
Avramidis, Elias & Norwich, Brahm (2002). Teachers' attitudes towards integra-
tion/inclusion: a review of the literature. European Journal of Special Needs Educa-
tion, 17(2), 129-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/08856250210129056
Badia, Antoni & Becerril, Lorena (2016). Renaming teaching practice through teacher
reflection using critical incidents on a virtual training course. Journal of Education
for Teaching, 42(2), 224-238. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2016.1143146
Bakkenes, Inge; Vermunt, Jan D. & Wubbels, Theo (2010). Teacher learning in the con-
text of educational innovation: Learning activities and learning outcomes of experi-
enced teachers. Learning and Instruction, 20(6), 533-548.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.09.001
Beauchamp, Catherine & Thomas, Lynn (2009). Understanding teacher identity: An
overview of issues in the literature and implications for teacher education. Cam-
bridge Journal of Education, 39(2), 175-189.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057640902902252
Beijaard, Douwe (2017). Learning teacher identity in teacher education. In Jean Clan-
dinin & Jukka Husu (Eds.). The SAGE handbook of research on teacher education (pp.
139–142). London: SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781526402042
Beijaard, Douwe; Meijer, Paulien & Verloop, Nico (2004). Reconsidering research on
teachers' professional identity. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(2), 107-128.
Beijaard, Douwe; Verloop, Nico & Vermunt, Jan D. (2000). Teachers’ perceptions of
professional identity: An exploratory study from a personal knowledge perspective.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 16(7), 749-764. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0742-
051x(00)00023-8

Blomberg, Geraldine; Sherin, Miriam Gamoran; Renkl, Alexander; Glogger, Inga &
Seidel, Tina (2014). Understanding video as a tool for teacher education: investigat-
ing instructional strategies to promote reflection. Instructional Science, 42(3), 443-
463. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-013-9281-6
Bosma, Harke A. & Kunnen, E. Saskia (2001). Determinants and mechanisms in Ego
identity development: a review and synthesis. Developmental Review, 21(1), 39-66.
https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.2000.0514
Branco, Angela & Madureira, Ana F. (2008). Dialogical Self in action: The emergence of
Self—Positions among complex emotional and cultural dimensions. Estudios de Psico-
logía, 29(3), 319-332. https://doi.org/10.1174/021093908786145377
Butler, Deborah L. & Schnellert, Leyton (2012). Collaborative inquiry in teacher pro-
fessional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(8), 1206-1220.
Chee, Yam Sam; Mehrotra, Swati & Ong, Jing Chuan (2015). Professional development
for scaling pedagogical innovation in the context of game-based learning: Teacher
identity as cornerstone in “shifting” practice. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Educa-
tion, 43(5), 423-437. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866x.2014.962484
Cochran-Smith, Marilyn & Lytle, Susan L. (1999). Relationships of knowledge and prac-
tice: Teacher learning in communities. Review of Research in Education, 24, 249–
305. https://doi.org/10.2307/1167272
Collet-Sabé, Jordi (2017). I do not like what I am becoming but…: transforming the
identity of head teachers in Catalonia. Journal of Educational Policy, 32(2), 141-158.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2016.1253873
Day, Christopher; Sammons, Pam; Stobart, Gordon; Kington, Alison & Gu, Qing (2007).
Teachers matter: Connecting lives, work and effectiveness. Maidenhead: Open Uni-
versity Press.
Ertmer, Peggy A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest
for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development,
53(4), 25-39. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02504683
Fogleman, Jay; Fishman, Barry & Krajcik, Joe (2006). Sustaining innovations through
lead teacher learning: A learning sciences perspective on supporting professional de-
velopment. Teaching Education, 17(2), 181-194.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10476210600680416
Freeman, Donald (1993). Renaming experience/reconstructing practice: Developing
new understanding of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(5-6), 85–497.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051x(93)90032-c
Gaete Vergara, Marcela (2018). A look at secondary student teachers' fears between
reproduction and transformation. Profesorado –Revista de curriculum y formación
del profesorado, 22(1), 501-517.
Gee, James (1990). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. Philadelph-
ia: Falmer. https://doi.org/10.1016/0898-5898(91)90011-7
Geijsel, Femke; Sleegers, Peter; van den Berg, Rudolf & Kelchtermans, Geert (2001).
Conditions fostering the implementation of large-scale innovation programs in
schools: Teachers’ perspectives. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(1), 130-

166. https://doi.org/10.1177/00131610121969262
Geijsels, Femke & Meijers, Frans (2005). Identity learning: The core process of educa-
tional change. Educational Studies, 31(4), 419-430.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03055690500237488
Ghaith, Ghazi & Yaghi, Hussein (1997). Relationships among experience, teacher effi-
cacy, and attitudes toward the implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching
and Teacher Education, 13(4), 451-458. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0742-
051x(96)00045-5
Gülerce, Aydan; Baerveldt, Cor; Gillespie, Alex; Martin, Jack; Raggatt, Peter &
Zittoun, Tania (2014). A polylogue? Where and how to move with and in dialogue?
New Ideas in Psychology, 32, 80-87.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2013.05.002
Guskey, Thomas R. (1988). Teacher efficacy, self-concept, and attitudes toward the
implementation of instructional innovation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 4(1),
63-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051x(88)90025-x
Hatton, Neville & Smith, David (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards defi-
nition and implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(1), 33-49.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051x(94)00012-u
Hayward, Louise & Spencer, Ernest (2010). The complexities of change: formative as-
sessment in Scotland. Curriculum Journal, 21(2), 161-177.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2010.480827
Heick, Terry (2019) 12 barriers to innovation in education. Retrieved from:
https://www.teachthought.com/the-future-of-learning/12-barriers-innovation-
education/.
Hermans, Hubert J. M. (2001). The construction of a personal position repertoire:
Method and practice. Culture & Psychology, 7(3), 323-365.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1354067x0173005
Hermans, Hubert J. M. (2018). Society in the Self. A theory of identity in democracy.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190687793.001.0001
Hermans, Hubert J. M., & Hermans-Konopka, Agnieszka (2010). Dialogical Self Theory:
Positioning and counter-positioning in a globalizing society. Cambridge, UK: Cam-
bridge. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511712142
Hermans, Hubert J. M.; Kempen, Harry J. & Van Loon, Rens J. (1992). The dialogical
self: beyond individualism and rationalism. American Psychologist, 47(1), 23–33.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.47.1.23
Ivanova, Natalia & Popova, Elena (2017). Professionals and the problem of implement-
ing innovation in university. Educational Studies Moscow, 1, 184-206.
https://doi.org/10.17323/1814-9545-2017-1-184-206
Jennings, Patricia A. & Greenberg, Mark T. (2009). The prosocial classroom: Teacher
social and emotional competence in relation to student and classroom outcomes. Re-
view of Educational Research, 79(1), 491-525.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654308325693

Ketelaar, Evelien; Beijaard, Douwe; Boshuizen, Henny P. & Den Brok, Perry J. (2012).
Teachers’ positioning towards an educational innovation in the light of ownership,
sense-making and agency. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28(2), 273-282.
Ketelaar, Evelien; Koopman, Maaike; Den Brok, Perry J.; Beijaard, Douwe & Bosh-
uizen, Henry P. (2014). Teachers’ learning experiences in relation to their owner-
ship, sense-making and agency. Teachers and Teaching, 20(3), 314-337.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.848523
Kim, Min Kyu; Xie, Kui & Cheng, Sheng-Lun (2017). Building teacher competency for
digital content evaluation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 66, 309-324.
Kunnen, Saskia & Metz, Marijke (2015). Commitment and exploration: The need for a
developmental approach. In Kate C. McLean, & Moin Syed (Eds.), The Oxford hand-
book of identity development (pp. 125-131). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199936564.001.0001
Leaman, Lori Hostetler & Flanagan, Toni Michele (2013). Authentic role-playing as sit-
uated learning: Reframing teacher education methodology for higher-order thinking.
Studying Teacher Education, 9(1), 45–61.
https://doi.org/10.1080/17425964.2013.771573
Lengelle, Reinekke (2016). What a career coach can learn from a playwright: Expres-
sive dialogues for identity development. In Hubert Hermans (Eds). Assessing and
Stimulating a Dialogical Self in Groups, Teams, Cultures, and Organizations (pp. 37-
53). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-32482-1_3
Levin, Barbara & He, Ye (2008). Investigating the content and sources of teacher can-
didates' personal practical theories (PPTs). Journal of Teacher Education, 59(1), 55-
68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022487107310749
MacLure, Maggie (1993). Arguing for yourself: Identity as an organising principle in
teachers' jobs and lives. British Educational Research Journal, 19(4), 311-323.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192930190401
Meeus, Wim; Van de Schoot, Rens; Keijsers, Loes; Schwartz, Seth J. & Branje, Susan
(2010). On the progression and stability of adolescent identity formation: A five-
wave longitudinal study in early-to-middle and middle-to-late adolescence. Child
Development, 81(3), 1565-1581. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01492.x
Monereo, Carles; Badia, Antoni; Bilbao, Gilda; Cerrato, Maria & Weise, Crista (2009).
Ser un docente estratégico: cuando cambiar la estrategia no basta. Cultura y Educa-
ción, 21(3), 237-256. https://doi.org/10.1174/113564009789052343
Monereo, Carles; Weise, Crista & Alvarez, Ibis (2013). Changing university teacher's
identity: training based on dramatized incidents. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 36(3), 323-
340. https://doi.org/10.1174/021037013807533043
OECD (2016). Innovating education and educating for innovation: The power of digital
technologies and skills. Paris: OECD Publishing.
https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264265097-en
Peterson, Cynthia & Bond, Nathan (2004). Online compared to face-to-face teacher
preparation for learning standards-based planning skills. Journal of Research on
Technology in Education, 36(4), 345-360.

https://doi.org/10.1080/15391523.2004.10782419
Pietarinen, Janne; Pyhältö, Kirsi & Soini, Tiina (2017). Large-scale curriculum reform
in Finland – exploring the interrelation between implementation strategy, the func-
tion of the reform, and curriculum coherence. The Curriculum Journal, 28(1), 22-40.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2016.1179205
Pillen, Marieke; Beijaard, Douwe & Den Brok, Perry (2013). Professional identity ten-
sions of beginning teachers. Teachers and Teaching, 19(6), 660-678.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2013.827455
Piwowar, Valentina; Thiel, Felicitas & Ophardt, Diemut (2013). Training inservice
teachers' competencies in classroom management. A quasi-experimental study with
teachers of secondary schools. Teaching and Teacher Education, 30, 1-12.
Putnam, Ralph T. & Borko, Hilda (2000). What do new views of knowledge and thinking
have to say about research on teacher learning? Educational Researcher, 29(1), 4–15.
https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x029001004
Raggatt, Peter T. F. (2015). Positioning: dialogical voice in mind and culture. Theory &
Psychology, 25(6), 775-797. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959354315590850
Rivas, Axel (2017). Cambio e innovación educativa: las cuestiones cruciales. Buenos
Aires: Fundación Santillana.
Room 241 (2018, March 16). Bloc of Concordia University of Portland. Innovation in
Education: What Does It Mean, and What Does It Look Like? March 16, 2018.
https://education.cu-portland.edu/blog/classroom-resources/educational-
innovations-roundup/
Rovegno, Inez (1992). Learning a new curricular approach: Mechanisms of knowledge
acquisition in preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8(3), 253-264.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051x(92)90024-w
Sachs, Judyth (2005). Teacher education and the development of professional identity:
Learning to be a teacher. In Pam Denicolo & Michael Kopf (Eds.), Connecting policy
and practice: Challenges for teaching and learning in schools and universities (pp. 2-
21). Oxford: Routledge.
Sadovnikova, Nadezhda & Ahmedov, Mirza (2019). Relevant concepts of a teacher’s
state when experiencing professional identity crisis. Education and Science, 21(2),
113-131. https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2019-2-113-131
Scartezini, Raquel & Monereo, Carles (2016). The development of university teachers’
professional identity: a dialogical study. Research Papers in Education, 33(1), 42-58.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2016.1225805
Schmidt, Michèle & Datnow, Amanda (2005). Teachers’ sense-making about compre-
hensive school reform: The influence of emotions. Teaching and Teacher Education,
21, 949–965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2005.06.006
Soini, Tiina; Pietarinen, Janne & Pyhältö, Kirsi (2018). Shared sense-making strategies
in curriculum reform: district-level perspective. Improving Schools, 21(2), 111-126.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480217744290

Spillane, James; Reiser, Brian & Reimer, Todd (2002). Policy implementation and cog-
nition: Reframing and refocusing implementation research. Review of Educational
Research, 72, 387–431. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543072003387
Stevens, Robert J. (2004). Why do educational innovations come and go? What do we
know? What can we do? Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(4), 389-396.
Toom, Auli; Husu, Jukka & Patrikainen, Sanna (2015). Student teachers’ patterns of
reflection in the context of teaching practice. European Journal of Teacher Educa-
tion, 38(3), 320-340. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2014.943731
Trigwell, Keith; Prosser, Michael & Waterhouse, Fiona (1999). Relations between
teachers' approaches to teaching and students' approaches to learning. Higher Edu-
cation, 37(1), 57-70. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003548313194
Twyford, Kaye; Le Fevre, Deidre & Timperley, Helen (2017). The influence of risk and
uncertainty on teachers' responses to professional learning and development. Journal
of Professional Capital and Community, 2(2), 86-100. https://doi.org/10.1108/jpcc-
10-2016-0028
Vähäsantanen, Katja (2015). Professional agency in the stream of change: Understand-
ing educational change and teachers' professional identities. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 47, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.11.006
Valsiner, Jaan (2004). The promoter sign: Developmental transformation within the
structure of the dialogical self. In XVIII biennial meeting of the international society
for the study of behavioral development, Ghent, july 11-15.
Van Veen, Klaas & Sleegers, Peter (2006). How does it feel? Teachers’ emotions in a
context of change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 38, 85–111.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00220270500109304
Vangrieken, Katrien; Dochy, Filip; Raes, Elisabeth & Kyndt, Eva (2015). Teacher col-
laboration: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 15, 17-40.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.04.002
Warford, Mark K. (2011). The zone of proximal teacher development. Teaching and
Teacher Education 27(2), 252–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.08.008
Wenger-Trayner, Etienne; Fenton-O'Creevy, Mark; Hutchinson, Steven; Kubiak, Chhris
& Wenger-Trayner, Beverly (2014). Learning in Landscapes of Practice: Boundaries,
identity, and knowledgeability in practice-based learning. Abingdon: Routledge.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315777122
Westaway, Lise & Graven, Mellony (2019). Exploring grade 3 teachers' resistance to
"take up' progressive mathematics teaching roles. Mathematics Education Research
Journal, 31(1); 27-46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-018-0237-7
Zhang, Jianwei; Hong, Huang-Yao; Scardamalia, Marlene; Teo, Chew Lee & Morley,
Elizabeth A. (2011). Sustaining knowledge building as a principle-based innovation at
an elementary school. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 20(2), 262-307.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10508406.2011.528317
CARLES MONEREO
Full professor of Educational Psychology at the Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona.
He is currently the coordinator of the SINTE research team. His lines of research fo-
cus on the construction of professional identity, teaching and learning strategies,
and the analysis of critical incidents in education.
carles.monereo@uab.cat
https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7447-985X
ANTONI BADIA
Full professor of Educational Psychology at the Open University of Catalonia. He is
currently involved in some research projects, including the teacher identity and the
development of the inquirer-teacher identity in the context of educational innova-
tions. His current research interests also include technology-enhanced learning and
learning with online learning environments.
tbadia@uoc.edu
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1294-8061
FORMATO DE CITACIÓN
Monereo, Carles & Badia, Antoni (2020).A dialogical self-approach to understanding
teacher identity in times of educational innovations. Quaderns de Psicologia, 22(2),
e1572. http://dx.doi.org/10.5565/rev/qpsicologia.1572
HISTORIA EDITORIAL
Recibido: 16-09-2019
1ª revisión: 02-03-2020
Aceptado: 16-04-2020
Publicado: 31-08-2020

A Dialogical Self-Approach To Understanding Teacher Identity in Times of Educational Innovations

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

A Dialogical Self-Approach To Understanding Teacher Identity in Times of Educational Innovations

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro.

2, e1572 ISNN: 0211-3481

A dialogical self-approach to understanding teacher iden-

logical approach. Second, we defend the crucial importance of educational in-

CURRENT PSYCHOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVES OF TEACHER LEARNING

Learning Programme Purpose of teacher Instructional

Social co- Participation in

Table 1. Teacher knowledge development perspective

The first mechanism, acquisition of academic knowledge, refers to how teach-

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

The second mechanism, construction of knowledge, refers to how a teacher’s

Learning Programme Purpose of Instructional

teaching Strategic teaching

Table 2. Teacher competencies development perspective

Some examples of this approach include in-service training on teachers’ com-

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

chological perspectives focusing on teachers’ identities and based on the dia-

TEACHERS’ CHANGES IN PROFESSIONAL IDENTITY FROM THE DIALOGICAL SELF-

the notion of teaching I-positions. Table 3 shows the main characteristics of

Programme Purpose of Instructional

Table 3. Teaching identity development perspective

The first learning mechanism, renaming experience, involves the appropriation

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

Hermans-Konopka, 2010, p. 228). The counter I-position, of course, performs

EDUCATIONAL INNOVATIONS AS GENERATORS OF CRITICAL INCIDENTS

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

Therefore, the ultimate goal of educational innovation is to improve what is

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

(2010) focused on describing teachers’ learning activities and outcomes in the

2015), educational innovations are successful when they rely on professionals

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

thinking. A teacher’s identity serves as a lens through which a teacher justifies

Filip Berta Eva Ivan Christine

He aims to provide education and is in-

has doubts about porter is Filip, and

vation. He some- suade the whole

He tries to per- She tries to avoid

negotiate with Ivan ate with Ivan with

Table 4. Participants’ characteristics in a case of educational innovation

Traditionally, educational innovations have been evaluated using descriptors

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN I-POSITIONS, WE-POSITIONS AND EDUCATIONAL

Figure 1. Relations between I-positions

Their personal repertoires of positions (PPR, by Hermans, 2001) are as follows:

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

Figure 2. Filip’s Personal Positions Repertoire

Figure 3. Berta’s Personal Positions Repertoire

Figure 4. Eva’s Personal Positions Repertoire

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

Figure 5. Ivan’s Personal Positions Repertoire

Figure 6. Christine’s Personal Positions Repertoire

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

2- As a learning and discursive community, team members share, to a greater

Figure 7. Teacher Team Community Identity Plot

tains a similar discourse and bidirectional form of democratic communication,

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

The dialogical self-approach applied in teacher professional identity research

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

schools: Teachers’ perspectives. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37(1), 130-

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

Technology in Education, 36(4), 345-360.

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

Quaderns de Psicologia | 2020, Vol. 22, Nro. 2, e1572

You might also like